PWND! [1 or 2]

[Guest15937]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

seriously, we NEED a "??" for songs like this

[One Winged Angel]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

OWA's face when that's 7 more than what he asked for

Not to demean rushy's AAA but I did stipulate playing purely spread when I said what you're referencing.

I'd still argue it's FGO to AAA with setup manipulation. I'd prefer that this didn't unlock any tokens related to AAA'ing, but I'm not exactly opposed to having this unlock scarhand. I was debating either 78 or 88 prior to this coming out (for obvious reasons), and I'm still debating between those two.

But again, I'm not against files like PWND!/CP/P4U v1 receiving non-numerical ratings. The issue would be coming up with a title for these types of files that still looks somewhat professional (because [dumb], [gay], [lol], etc. aren't gonna fly).

[??] could work.

[Untimely Friction]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

Once again, TOO EASY FOR SCARHAND DONT DO IT

[hi19hi19]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

Why couldn't it have been Larpus, I liked that a lot better than PWND!... (sorry off topic, but)

Probably permission. Same reason In Da Club hasn't been re-added either lmao

Apparently someone back in the day (probably Bemaniruler or Synth) got permission for Beethoven Virus itself, but not BanYa blanket permission.

EDIT- I would be fine with [??]
Add Winning and TWWW to that list too lol

The bigger question is if non-numerical difficulties breaks any site programming. Handle your exceptions, kids.

[rushyrulz]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

Any rating given needs to include the possibility of doing key setup tricks like this.
It's the same discussion we had with overlay and Crowdpleaser/p4u v1, fortunately even with overlay those files are clearly FSO so it's not as big a deal. This is different because of the degree to which switching setup trivializes it from doing it pure spread, and the fact that doing so drops it into token unlock range, something that's supposed to feel like a milestone and not something you get off a file because it's misrated.

Could just leave it at 1? lol

It's by no means easy to pull off, I was just being a nerd about it lol.

[One Winged Angel]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

I've been informed by a higher power that non-numerical difficulty ratings will cause FFR to catch fire and explode.

However, ratings of 0 would be acceptable.

Thoughts?

[ItsOnlyDanO]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

0 would be an interesting rating

[PhantomPuppy]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

it should totally be ranked a 0. 10 outta 10.

[SK8R43]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

zero sounds legit

[hi19hi19]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

zero sounds legit

add crowdpleaser, p4u v1, Winning and TWWW too imo
can't think of any others as glaring as these. should keep it rare, even spiky files should be rated as best as possible (ABCDEath kind of files, even though people have a big range of opinions, it's not >20 difficulty points spread difference like this lol)
it's only the ones that are really polarizing for other reasons (such as course mods and key setup issues) that should get zeroes

[One Winged Angel]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

Yeah I agree with you. Re-iterating what I mentioned to Prawn, I'd want clear guidelines to establish what gets 0'd and what doesn't. I like the idea of anything with gimmicks, zero framers, or short (under 30 notes or so) but extremely intense spikes that are 20 points or greater in difficulty compared to the rest of the file receiving a rating 0. Anything that doesn't fall into one of those categories gets a legitimate rating. vrofl can stay 999 despite having zero framers because vrofl.

I know there will be some people who would argue files like Revo and System Doctor should receive 0s despite their spikier sections being of longer durations, but then it gets really hazy on what should get a 0 and what shouldn't. With the aforementioned guidelines, I think it's as kept as simple and clearcut as possible.

[hi19hi19]

Re: PWND! [1 or 2]

Revo and System Doctor are not gimmick files. Terrible =/= gimmick file.

I like the guidelines.